David Daney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I am working on a private target where jump instruction patterns are
> > similiar to this
> >
> > jmp <24 bit offset>
> > jmp for 32 bit offsets
> >
> > if my offset is greater than 24 bits, then i have to move the offset
> > to an address register. But
"RAHUL V R" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > On 05 Dec 2006 07:05:33 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "RAHUL V R" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > I am working on adding a new data type in gcc under C.
> > > Please tell me, if I don't want to use the debugging info/format in
Rohit Arul Raj wrote:
Hi all,
I am working on a private target where jump instruction patterns are
similiar to this
jmp <24 bit offset>
jmp for 32 bit offsets
if my offset is greater than 24 bits, then i have to move the offset
to an address register. But inside the branch instruction (in md
Hi all,
I am working on a private target where jump instruction patterns are
similiar to this
jmp <24 bit offset>
jmp for 32 bit offsets
if my offset is greater than 24 bits, then i have to move the offset
to an address register. But inside the branch instruction (in md
file), i am not able to
Hello,
Kindly answer my below query on: "modifications required on
'dbxout.c', while adding a new data type in gcc under C"
On 05 Dec 2006 07:05:33 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"RAHUL V R" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I am working on adding a new data type in gcc under C.
After
0. Making Jack's suggested changes to prune.exp (even though they
didn't catch any new linker messages);
1. Configuring and making with
/bin/rm -rf *; env CC=/pkgs/gcc-4.2.0-64/bin/gcc ../configure --
build=powerpc64-apple-darwin8.8.0 --host=powerpc64-apple-darwin8.8.0
--target=po
Hi,
I'm trying to know more about how messages are send to the
objects in objective-C, how they are store,...
In which structures en how?
Where should I look in the source code of gcc to know it?
I looked in libobjc but I'm a bit lost.
Thanks very much
See How Messaging Works document at
http
> >I wrote a new pass for gcc. Actually the pass is always executed, but
> >I'd like to execute it only if I specify an option from shell (ex. gcc
> >--mypass pippo.c). How can I do?
This sounds surprisingly like a patch I've been promising Diego for
just about ever :-)
Ben
On Dec 6, 2006, at 8:19 AM, Come Lonfils wrote:
I'm trying to know more about how messages are send to the objects
in objective-C, how they are store,...
In which structures en how?
Where should I look in the source code of gcc to know it? I looked
in libobjc but I'm a bit lost.
I'd probabl
Richard Guenther wrote:
>> I wrote:
The speed up is around 5 %.
Is this because of cbrt or a combined effect? Can you measure the cbrt
effect in isolation?
This is a combined effect (assuming that things like x**1.5 didn't
expand to x * sqrt (x) before) - however, the number of opportunit
to see if that eliminates the problems. Also I
assume Bradley remembered to install the build
before running make check. I see lots of libgomp
failures I believe those could be due to that.
Also, Bradley, did you remember to patch the
prune.exp scripts in the testsuite? You will
get a huge numbe
Hi,
In file "c-pragma.c" I try to implement my custom pragma handler where
I try to traverse the statements within the function where the pragma
is detected. To implement the traversal I used the implementation of
"cgraph_create_edges" function as reference (in cgraphunit.c file).
My code is as
Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
Beman Dawes writes:
I've proposed adding raw string literals to C++. See
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2053.html
Interesting idea.
I think there is a misspelling of std::ispunct in there.
Yep. Fixed in the revision. Thanks!
So far, the c
Steve,
That comment isn't quite fair. Currently on MacOS X
10.4.8, we only have 32 failures for both -m32 and -m64
in the fortran testsuite. Three quarters of those are
definitely due to the problem with the long double
system calls not being mapped and the other ones
(due to isfinite breakage)
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 02:41:47AM -0500, Bradley Lucier wrote:
>
> On Dec 6, 2006, at 2:18 AM, Steve Kargl wrote:
>
> >
> >>On Dec 6, 2006, at 1:33 AM, Steve Kargl wrote:
> >>
> >>>So when was the last good bootstrap?
> >>
> >>I last bootstrapped and regtested this configuration here
> >>
> >>ht
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 06:52:39PM +0100, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
>
> If hardware x86 decoders (i.e., Intel or AMD processors)
> get measurably faster with the new order, that would be
> a good reason to change it.
I was told that AMD processors had no preferences and Intel processors
preferred
On Wed, 6 Dec 2006 09:00:30 -0800, H. J. Lu wrote:
>On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 08:43:17AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>> On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 23:00:14 -0800 H. J. Lu wrote:
>>
>> > On x86, the order of prefix SEG_PREFIX, ADDR_PREFIX, DATA_PREFIX and
>> > LOCKREP_PREFIX isn't fixed. Currently, gas genera
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 08:43:17AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 23:00:14 -0800 H. J. Lu wrote:
>
> > On x86, the order of prefix SEG_PREFIX, ADDR_PREFIX, DATA_PREFIX and
> > LOCKREP_PREFIX isn't fixed. Currently, gas generates
> >
> > LOCKREP_PREFIX ADDR_PREFIX DATA_PREFIX SEG_
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 23:00:14 -0800 H. J. Lu wrote:
> On x86, the order of prefix SEG_PREFIX, ADDR_PREFIX, DATA_PREFIX and
> LOCKREP_PREFIX isn't fixed. Currently, gas generates
>
> LOCKREP_PREFIX ADDR_PREFIX DATA_PREFIX SEG_PREFIX
>
> I will check in a patch:
>
> http://sourceware.org/ml/binutil
Hi,
I'm trying to know more about how messages are send to the objects in
objective-C, how they are store,...
In which structures en how?
Where should I look in the source code of gcc to know it? I looked in libobjc
but I'm a bit lost.
Thanks very much
Côme Lonfils
> DJ, as a build machinery maintainer, you are authorized to approve
> such a patch. Is anything holding you back?
You mean, besides politics?
The last time such a patch came through, we were in the middle of
discussing the various --with-* options. I wanted to let that settle
first.
Beman Dawes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've proposed adding raw string literals to C++. See
> http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2053.html
Interesting idea.
I think there is a misspelling of std::ispunct in there.
> So far, the changes to accommodate raw string literals
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006, DJ Delorie wrote:
> Paolo Bonzini <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > That idea got nixed, but I think it's time to revisit it. Paolo has
> > > worked out the kinks in the configury and we should apply his patch and
> > > import the gmp/mpfr sources, IMHO.
> >
> > Note that thes
I've proposed adding raw string literals to C++. See
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2006/n2053.html
The C++ committee's reaction was favorable, although the specifics of
the delimiter syntax may change a bit. (Committee members find the R
prefix ugly, but no one has come up
Richard Warburton wrote on 12/06/06 09:44:
Thanks for this information. I presume from you response that there
is a plan to address this issues, is this something that will be
happening in the 'near-term', by that I mean within the next 6-9
months?
Well, we will need something like this for the
Thanks for this information. I presume from you response that there
is a plan to address this issues, is this something that will be
happening in the 'near-term', by that I mean within the next 6-9
months?
Richard
On 12/6/06, Diego Novillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Richard Warburton wrote on
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, DJ Delorie wrote:
> At the very least, we should be configured so that we *could* have an
> in-tree mpfr, should vendors choose to add it. Saving customers the
> misery of figuring out how to build and install gmp/mpfr is the type
> of value add they'd appreciate.
DJ, as a bu
From: Markus Franke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2006 21:37:30 +0100
Subject: poisened macro definitions
Dear GCC Developers,
I want to port an existing backend (based on version gcc-2.7.2.3) on the
most recent release (gcc-4.1.1). During compilation process I get
sev
Richard Warburton wrote on 12/06/06 07:59:
I would be most grateful of an answer to these questions, since I find
the implementation of the gimple type system to be a little puzzling.
That's because there is *no* GIMPLE type system. GIMPLE latches on to
the type system of the input language,
This is a question pertaining to types of variables and expressions
within the Gimple IR. When I refer to gimple, I mean gimple as going
into the optimisation phase (after it has been lowered), As I
understand it the situation in gimple is as follows:
1. Language specific structures have been re
Hoehenleitner, Thomas wrote on 12/06/06 07:08:
after unsuccessful search in the doc, the web and this mailing list I
decided to launch this question here:
Offtopic in this forum. Please use [EMAIL PROTECTED] or comp.lang.c.
This list is for GCC *development*.
Hoehenleitner, Thomas writes:
> ps: Please ignore the following attachment. I am writing from my company
> account and can not avoid it.
Please do not send e-mail with this sort of disclaimer to the gcc
mailing lists. They are against list policy, as described here:
http://gcc.gnu.org/lists
Hello community,
after unsuccessful search in the doc, the web and this mailing list I
decided to launch this question here:
I wrote a data logger which simply saves the address of the format
string and the arguments of a printf-like function into a buffer. A call
looks for example like this:
33 matches
Mail list logo
